We don't talk much about the poor anymore. Talking about class, in general, is viewed as one of the few faux pas left in American life.

Pope Francis waves to the crowd from the central balcony of St. Peter's Basilica at the Vatican on Wednesday, March 13. Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, who chose the name Francis, is the 266th pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church.AP

Pretty much everyone says they're middle class, except maybe if your address is a cardboard box or you own your own jet.

But there is a huge and growing gap between rich and poor in our country and in our state.

I am not Catholic. But I was deeply moved to hear the new pontiff, who leads a faith of 1.2 billion souls, start the conversation about taking care of the least among us. That seems to be a more thoughtful approach than throwing up our hands and glibly declaring that the poor will always be among us, which is the de rigueur thing to do.

I have covered politics for the better part of 11 years. And I can probably count on my two hands the number of times that the debate has focused on what's best for people who are poor -- who don't have enough money at the end of the month to pay the rent, to see a doctor, to get everything on their grocery list. The discussion is almost always about how little we can spend and how evil government programs are.

The people who benefit from these supposedly horrid symbols of an insatiable government run amok remain faceless and nameless. Maybe it's easier that way.

But one-third of Americans receive government assistance in one form or another, and that doesn't even include Medicare or Social Security. If you want to write off these struggling folks as freeloaders, that's 148 million people to try and ignore.

There are many important issues that I feel passionately about -- women's rights, civil liberties, foreign policy, civil rights and education. But if I had to pick one problem that needs attention, it would be poverty and inequality.

This isn't an issue that affects me personally, but I have always believed there before the grace of God go I. I provide a nice, (truly) middle-class life for my daughter, something I've achieved through hard work and skill. But I've also been blessed with a lot of good luck. If one or two things had gone differently, I could easily be one of those people applying for unemployment or food stamps.

And if you're honest, you could be, too.

But I don't take the view that politics and governing are about me -- they're about Rousseau's social contract. There are certain things we owe each other in a civilized society. The goal is to elect the most competent people and find the most effective way to uphold that contract.

Wealth inequality -- which includes people's investments and other assets, not just salaries -- is even starker in America. The top 1 percent in our country has 35 percent of the wealth, while the bottom 90 percent only has 23 percent.

Not surprisingly, people in a 2011 study by Harvard and Duke professors said they thought things were far more equal than they were. And people wanted more economic equality, which, in the era of GOP former vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan's budget, is hysterically derided as a cry for socialism.

Case in point, with President Obama, who sometimes tries to address this problem.

"We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by,” he said in his 2012 State of the Union address. “Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules."

It's not really a coincidence that our president has been slammed a socialist by Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and even "Republican reformer" Haley Barbour -- and that's a short list.

What about inequality in Michigan? Well, there's a obviously a sharp contrast between living in Bloomfield Hills and the Cass corridor in Detroit. There are many metrics we could use to evaluate this, but Gov. Rick Snyder's much-lauded dashboard doesn't include many, which says something about his priorities.

One metric covered in Snyder's dashboard is that more than 1 million adults don't have health insurance.

But the GOP-controlled Legislature seems poised to buck their governor's recommendation to ensure that 450,000 of them get coverage under Medicaid -- something that would save the state's budget $200 million, by the way.

We can and should have debates about the effectiveness of programs like the Family Independence Program and Bridge cards. Many of these programs were designed decades ago. There's a host of social scientific research on what motivates people and how to design programs around that.

But to start with the premise that all people who use these programs are lazy cheats who don't deserve anything -- which is where the debate is right now in the Michigan Legislature and U.S. Congress -- is wrong and insulting.

Last week, U.S. Sen. Ron Portman (R-Ohio) captured headlines for understandably coming out in favor of same-sex marriage because his only son is gay. Some liberals didn't cut Portman a lot of slack, like Metro Times columnist Jack Lessenberry, who advised folks to "find a Republican whose family is afflicted by whatever you care about, and elect them to high office."

I don't bear any ill will toward Portman; we all want what's best for our kids. And he's now on the right side of history. But there's something to be said for Slate financial columnist Matthew Yglesias' observation that "Senators basically never have poor kids."

They don't have to watch their kids fight hunger in the summer when there's no free lunch at school. They don't have to worry about their kids having to play in the dark because they couldn't pay the electric bill that month. And those senators probably don't know many people who do face those struggles.

Meanwhile, Pope Francis didn't have to live in a poor neighborhood in Buenos Aires. He didn't have to take the bus after he was elected pope. That he chose to do so says something profound about his values.

I think he has a lot to teach us all.

Susan J. Demas is a political analyst and an award-winning journalist. She can be reached at sjdemas@gmail.com. Follow her on Twitter here.